For Limited Circulation Only

Report on
TESTING OF SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM R.O.B. SITE AT
BHANDARI BAGH, DEHRADUN

Submitted to

Executive Engineer, PWD

Construction Division,
Dehradun

Prepared By

Dr. Satyendra Mittal,

Professor

Department Of Civil Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
ROORKEE – 247 667 (Uttarakhand)

April-2024
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 4
2.0 TESTS CONDUCTED ON SOIL SAMPLES AND ROCK SAMPLES. 4

3.0 METHODOLOGY OF TESTS CONDUCTED 5

4.0 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS 5

5.0 LIQUID & PLASTIC LIMIT 16

6.0 SPECIFIC GRAVITY (G) AS PER IS:1122 16

7.0 THE POINT LOAD TESTS 17

8.0 WATER ABSOPTION TEST 19

9.0 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS 20

10.0 LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF PILE 21

11.0 CONCLUSIONS 24

REFERENCES 24

1
(SAMPLE SUPPLIED BY CLIENT- PHOTOGRAPHS)

2
3
 REPORT ON

TESTING OF SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM R.O.B. SITE AT

BHANDARI BAGH, DEHRADUN
By

Dr. Satyendra Mittal*

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Uttarakhand is newly carved state of India, where a lot of development activities are
taking place. Uttarakhand, being located in seismic zone IV and V of seismic
zonation map of India, experiences a lot of landslide activities. Dehradun is the
Capital of Uttarakhand, where a lot of construction activities are taking place. A
bridge (ROB) of 72m span is under construction in Bhandaribagh locality of
Dehradun by PWD. The Executive Engineer Construction Division Dehradun, vide
his letter no. 944 /1A, dt. 27/02/2024 requested the author of this report at IIT
Roorkee to conduct testing on selected soil and rock samples of this ROB site. The
clients had sent these samples to IIT Roorkee for assessment of their engg.
properties. The results of tests conducted are given below.

2.1 TESTS CONDUCTED ON SOIL SAMPLES AND ROCK SAMPLES FROM

DIFFERENT DEPTHS

Samples labeled as Bore No. 1 (from RP-1) with depths and Bore No. 2 (from RP-2)
with depths was sent by PWD Dehradun to IIT Roorkee (see photographs above).
The present report gives results of these samples, supplied by clients.

a. Grain size analysis b. Liquid & Plastic Limit

c. Specific gravity d. Point load test

e. Water absorption test f. Sheer Parameters (C & Ø)

P-3/Hemlata/Bhandari Bagh/2024
*Professor & Principal Investigator, Deptt. of Civil Engineering, I.I.T. , Roorkee, Ph:
09412074237, 0976001423, Fax: 01332-285837, Email: satyendramittal@gmail.com

4
3.0 METHODOLOGY OF TESTS CONDUCTED

All the tests were conducted as per Indian Standards. Latest BIS codes were
referred for conducting all the tests. All the samples were firstly oven dried and then
grain size analysis tests were carried out on all samples. The grain size analysis
curves are given vide Figs. 1 to 10 for soil samples. The liquid and plastic limits,
wherever applicable on soil samples, are also mentioned below. The Point load
tests results are given in subsequent paragraphs. The Specific gravity tests results
are also mentioned below. The water absorption test results are given in
subsequent paragraphs and tables. Before testing these samples, all the big size
boulders had been segregated from the samples.

4.0 GRAIN SIZE ANYLSIS TESTS

The results are summarized as below (Table 1): for Soil samples (Depth of 3.0m to
45.0m).

Table 1: Summary of Grain size distribution of Soil Samples collected from

Boreholes after removing particles > 22.5mm size

�
∁( )
Depths Bore Gravel Sand Fines Density Fig. Classification
No. (%) (%) (%) ∅ No.
�𝒒𝒎 kN/cum
(deg)

3.0 m 1 24.23 46.62 29.15 1 35 16.3 1 SM

9.0 m 1 8.55 25.54 65.91 4.1 28.5 15.1 2 CL

12.0 m 1 41.33 46.64 12.03 0.76 35 16.3 3 SM

33 m 1 0.18 4.56 95.26 7 28 14.7 4 CI

6.0 m 2 0 11.71 88.29 7 25 13.7 5 CI

9.0 m 2 75.82 23.77 0.41 1.1 36 18 6 GW

12.0 m 2 72.26 27.62 0.12 1.2 35 18.2 7 GW

21.0 m 2 60.93 38.11 0.96 2 32 17.5 8 GP

27.0 m 2 64.78 34.66 0.56 1.2 32 18 9 GW

33.0 m 2 0.14 7.99 91.87 7 29 14.5 10 CL

5
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 3.0 m

Description of sample B-1 Fig. 1
Container No. BH-1
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
44.44 0.06 D60 D30 D10
2 0.072 0.045

10 28.53 14.265 14.27 85.74 G Sand FINES

4.75 19.92 9.96 24.23 75.78 24.23 46.62 29.15
2 31.51 15.755 39.98 60.02
1 20.19 10.095 50.08 49.93
0.425 19.86 9.93 60.01 40.00
0.212 12.52 6.26 66.27 33.74 Soil Classification = SM
0.150 3.5 1.75 68.02 31.99
0.075 5.67 2.835 70.85 29.15
0.069 18.3 9.15 80.00 20.00
0.050 15 7.5 87.50 12.50
0.037 14 7 94.50 5.50
0.026 11 5.5 100.00 0.00

Fig. 1: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 3.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
Percent Finer(%)

60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
Soil Classification = SM
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

6
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Nainital Rajbhawan (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 9.0 m

Description of sample B-1 Fig. 2
Container No.
BH-1
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
1.84 1.26 D60 D30 D10
0.07 0.058 0.038

G Sand FINES
4.75 17.09 8.545 8.55 91.46 8.55 25.54 65.91
2 19.33 9.665 18.21 81.79
1 9.78 4.89 23.10 76.90
0.425 8.56 4.28 27.38 72.62
0.212 6.37 3.185 30.57 69.44 Soil Classification = CL
0.150 2.28 1.14 31.71 68.30
0.075 4.78 2.39 34.10 65.91
0.069 50.81 25.405 59.50 40.50
0.050 31 15.5 75.00 25.00
0.037 28 14 89.00 11.00
0.026 22 11 100.00 0.00 PI= 14.17 PL= 20.20 LL= 34.37

Fig. 2: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 9.0 m (March - 2024)
100
90
80
70
Percent Finer(%)

60
50 Soil Classification = CL
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

7
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 12.0 m

Description of sample B-1
BH-1 Fig. 3
Container No.
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
71.43 1.03 D60 D30 D10
5 0.6 0.07

10 19.78 9.89 9.89 90.11 G Sand FINES

4.75 62.88 31.44 41.33 58.67 41.33 46.64 12.03
2 17.56 8.78 50.11 49.89
1 24.7 12.35 62.46 37.54
0.425 24.7 12.35 74.81 25.19
0.212 15.53 7.765 82.58 17.43 Soil Classification = SM
0.150 7.77 3.885 86.46 13.54
0.075 3.02 1.51 87.97 12.03
0.069 9 4.5 92.47 7.53
0.050 6.06 3.03 95.50 4.50
0.037 5 2.5 98.00 2.00
0.026 4 2 100.00 0.00

Fig. 3: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 12.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
Percent Finer(%)

60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
Soil Classification = SM
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

8
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 33.0 m

Description of sample B-1 Fig. 4
BH-1
Container No.
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 100

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
1.63 1.28 D60 D30 D10
0.07 0.062 0.043

G Sand FINES
4.75 0.18 0.18 0.18 99.82 0.18 4.56 95.26
2 0.46 0.46 0.64 99.36
1 0.28 0.28 0.92 99.08
0.425 0.42 0.42 1.34 98.66
0.212 1.05 1.05 2.39 97.61 Soil Classification = CI
0.150 0.67 0.67 3.06 96.94
0.075 1.68 1.68 4.74 95.26
0.069 55 55 59.74 40.26
0.050 25 25 84.74 15.26
0.037 10.06 10.06 94.80 5.20
0.026 5.2 5.2 100.00 0.00 Pl= 20.26% PL=21.62% LL= 41.88%

Fig. 4: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 33.0 m (March - 2024)
100
90
80
70
Percent Finer(%)

60
50 Soil Classification = CI

40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

9
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION

DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 6.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 5
Container No.
BH-2
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 100

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
2.26 1.66 D60 D30 D10
0.07 0.06 0.031

G Sand FINES
0.00 11.71 88.29
2 0.16 0.16 0.16 99.84
1 0.52 0.52 0.68 99.32
0.425 1 1 1.68 98.32
0.212 2.76 2.76 4.44 95.56
0.150 1.96 1.96 6.40 93.60
0.075 5.31 5.31 11.71 88.29
0.069 45.1 45.1 56.81 43.19 Soil Classification = CI
0.050 22.09 22.09 78.90 21.10
0.037 11.1 11.1 90.00 10.00
0.026 10 10 100.00 0.00 PI=20.31% LL=35.90%, PL=15.59%

Fig. 5: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari bagh

Depth 6.0 m (March - 2024)
100
90
80
70
Percent Finer(%)

60
50 Soil Classification = CI

40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

10
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION

DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 9.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 6
Container No.
BH-2
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
4.50 1.50 D60 D30 D10
9 5.2 2

20 18.31 9.155 9.155 90.85

10 53.51 26.755 35.91 64.09 G Sand FINES
4.75 79.81 39.905 75.82 24.19 75.82 23.77 0.41
2 26.77 13.385 89.20 10.80
1 10.83 5.415 94.62 5.38
0.425 6.51 3.255 97.87 2.13
0.212 2.73 1.365 99.24 0.77 Soil Classification = GW
0.150 0.36 0.18 99.42 0.58
0.075 0.34 0.17 99.59 0.41
0.069 0.43 0.215 99.80 0.20
0.050 0.22 0.11 99.91 0.09
0.037 0.1 0.05 99.96 0.04
0.026 0.08 0.04 100.00 0.00

Fig. 6: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 9.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
Percent Finer(%)

60.00 Soil Classification = GW

50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)
11
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 12.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 7
Container No.
BH-2
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D6
5.32 0) 1.30 D60 D30 D10
10.1 5 1.9

20 38.42 19.21 19.21 80.79

10 49.9 24.95 44.16 55.84 G Sand FINES
4.75 56.19 28.095 72.26 27.75 72.26 27.62 0.12
2 32.52 16.26 88.52 11.49
1 12.87 6.435 94.95 5.05
0.425 7.48 3.74 98.69 1.31
0.212 2.02 1.01 99.70 0.30 Soil Classification = GW
0.150 0.2 0.1 99.80 0.20
0.075 0.16 0.08 99.88 0.12
0.069 0.12 0.06 99.94 0.06
0.050 0.06 0.03 99.97 0.03
0.037 0.04 0.02 99.99 0.01
0.026 0.02 0.01 100.00 0.00

Fig. 7: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 12.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
Percent Finer(%)

60.00 Soil Classification = GW

50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

12
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 21.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 8
BH-2
Container No.
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)
Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)

7.21 0.72 D60 D30 D10

10.1 3.2 1.4
20 67.79 33.895 33.895 66.11

10 16.28 8.14 42.04 57.97 G Sand FINES

4.75 37.78 18.89 60.93 39.08 60.93 38.11 0.96
2 43.91 21.955 82.88 17.12
1 20.55 10.275 93.16 6.85
0.425 9.23 4.615 97.77 2.23
0.212 2.09 1.045 98.82 1.19 Soil Classification = GP
0.150 0.25 0.125 98.94 1.06
0.075 0.20 0.1 99.04 0.96
0.069 0.9 0.45 99.49 0.51
0.050 0.5 0.25 99.74 0.26
0.037 0.48 0.24 99.98 0.02
0.026 0.04 0.02 100.00 0.00

Fig. 8: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 21.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00

90.00

80.00

70.00
Percent Finer(%)

60.00
Soil Classification = GP
50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

13
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 27.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 9
BH-2
Container No.
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 200

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
4.67 1.52 D60 D30 D10
7 4 1.5

20 11.4 5.7 5.7 94.30

10 35.05 17.525 23.23 76.78 G Sand FINES
4.75 83.1 41.55 64.78 35.23 64.78 34.66 0.56
2 38.82 19.41 84.19 15.82
1 19.92 9.96 94.15 5.86
0.425 8.34 4.17 98.32 1.69
0.212 1.8 0.9 99.22 0.79 Soil Classification = GW
0.150 0.2 0.1 99.32 0.69
0.075 0.25 0.125 99.44 0.56
0.069 0.86 0.43 99.87 0.13
0.050 0.14 0.07 99.94 0.06
0.037 0.08 0.04 99.98 0.02
0.026 0.04 0.02 100.00 0.00

Fig. 9: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 27.0 m (March - 2024)
100.00

90.00

80.00
Percent Finer(%)

70.00

60.00 Soil Classification = GW

50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)

14
 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION

DATA SHEET FOR SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

Name of Project Bhandari Bagh (March 2024)

ROB Project, Bhandaribagh

Sample No. Depth 33.0 m

Description of sample B-2 Fig. 10
BH-2
Container No.
Weight of Container(gms)
Weight of Container+Dry soil (gms)
Weight of Dry soil (gms) 100

IS Sieve Weight of sample Percent weight CumulativePercent Percent fines

designation(mm) retained (gms) retained (gms) retained (gms)

Cu=(D60/D10) Cc=(D30)**2/(D10*D60)
1.71 1.25 D60 D30 D10
0.07 0.06 0.041

G Sand FINES
4.75 0.14 0.14 0.14 99.86 0.14 7.99 91.87
2 0.59 0.59 0.73 99.27
1 0.52 0.52 1.25 98.75
0.425 0.95 0.95 2.20 97.80
0.212 1.84 1.84 4.04 95.96 Soil Classification = CL
0.150 1.03 1.03 5.07 94.93
0.075 3.06 3.06 8.13 91.87
0.069 50.17 50.17 58.30 41.70
0.050 19.7 19.7 78.00 22.00
0.037 18 18 96.00 4.00
0.026 4 4 100.00 0.00 PL=18.91% LL=34.15% PI=15.23%

Fig. 10: Grain Size Distribution Curve- Bhandari Bagh

Depth 27.0 m (March - 2024)
100

90

80

70
Percent Finer(%)

60

50
Soil Classification = CL
40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)
15
 5.0 LIQUID & PLASTIC LIMIT

The results are summarized as below (Table 2): for Soil samples (Depth of 9.0m BH-
1, Depth of 33.0m BH-1, Depth of 6.0m BH-2, and Depth of 33.0m BH-2).

Table 2: Summary of liquid & plastic limit results

Depth Bore No. Gravel Sand Fines Liquid Limit Plastic limit P.I. Fig.
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) No.

9.0 m 1 8.55 25.54 65.91 34.37 20.20 34.37 2

33.0 m 1 0.18 4.56 95.26 41.88 21.62 20.26 4

6.0 m 2 0 11.71 88.29 35.90 15.59 20.31 5

33.0 2 0.14 7.99 91.87 34.15 18.91 15.23 10

6.0 SPECIFIC GRAVITY (G) AS PER IS: 1122

The specific gravity values are given below: (Table 3A): for Soil samples (Depths of
15 & 27 m from BH 1 and depth of 9 m from BH 2). For details see Table 3B.

Table 3(A): Specific gravity results

Gravity
BH No. Depth
(G)

1 15.0 m 2.5

1 27.0 m 2.63

2 9.0 m 2.60

16
 Table 3(B): Details of Specific Gravity results

Table 3(B) Specific Gravity

BH 1 BH 2 BH 1
Depth - 15.0 m Depth - 9.0 m Depth - 27.0 m
S. No.
1 Weight of pycnometer (w1) 730 644 646
2 Weight of pycnometer with dry soil (w2) 940 842 846
3 Weight of pycnometer with dry soil and water (w3) 1738 1662 1676
4 Weight of pycnometer full of water (w4) 1612 1540 1552
5 Weight of dry soil (w2-w1) 210 198 200
6 Weight of an equal volume of water (w2-w1)-(w3-w4) 84 76 76
7 G= (5)/(6) 2.5 2.605263158 2.631578947

7.0 THE POINT LOAD TESTS

The tests were conducted on samples from BH no. 1 in a special point load test
strength index apparatus. BH no. 1, 1 specimen was tested from depth 6.0m (see
Fig. 11). The Summary of results is given in Tables 4 & 5 below:

Table 4: Summary of Result of Point Load (Box – 3)

Sample BH-No. Depth Dia (De) Load

(mm) (P)(kN)
Is = P/(D 2) (Is) 50 = (De/50)0.45 (P/(D 2)
No. e e
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
1. B.H No. 1 6.0 m t=52.74 7.5 2.70 2.77

Note: Only one sample was available for Point load test

17
Fig. 12: GALLERY OF PHOTOGRAPHS
SHOWING TESTS ON STONE SAMPLES

18
8.0WATER ABSORPTION TEST

The test is intended to measure the water absorption capacity of stones/ boulders.
These tests were conducted on samples marked as 5 and 6. The total stone pieces
weighing total to 1 kg were selected. These samples (as explained in Para 3.0
above) after immersing into distilled water were soaked and entrapped air was
removed by gentle agitation achieved by rapid clockwise and anti clockwise rotation
of vessel. The vessel was then emptied and Stone pieces were allowed to drain
.The stone pieces were then kept in boiling water for more than 2 hrs. After boiling,
all stone pieces were dried with neat cloth. It was then transferred to a second dry
cloth when the first one removes no further moisture. The stone pieces were than
exposed to atmosphere (but away from direct sun light or any other source of heat)
till its surface looks dry. The samples are then weighed and termed as (B). The
samples were then carefully kept in oven for more than 24 hrs (as per IS: 1124) and
after removing from oven, were cooled in a desiccators to room temperature and
weighed (A). The water absorption then is calculated from following relationship:
B A
Water absorption = X 100
A

The laboratory test data and their results are computed in Table 5 below:

Table 5: Water Absorption Test Results

BH-1 BH-2
Sample Item Depth –(6, 27,21,15)m Depth –
No. (3,9,12,15,27)m

1. Weight of container + wet 530 522

sample (B) gm

2. Weight of container+ dry 510 512

stone sample (A) gm

3. Water absorption (%) 𝟓 −𝟓 x 100 = 3.92% 𝟓 −𝟓 x 100 = 1.95%

𝟓 𝟓

Results
(a) Water absorption for BH-1= 3.92%

(b) Water absorption for BH-2= 1.95%

19
12.0 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS

Vide letter no. 1575/1C dt. 06/04/2024, the clients requested the author of this
report to conduct Liquefaction analysis. During a meeting, held among TCS
Dehradun (the consultants of this project) and IIT officers and EPIL officer in IIT
Roorkee on Apr. 6, 2024, it was construed that TCS Dehradun had done the
liquefaction analysis for this project site. The author of this report checked the same
is attached below. According to this report, there is no chance of liquefaction at this
site.

20
 Typical Computation of Liquefaction Potential by Simplified Method

Name of Project : Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed ROB at Bhandari Bagh, Dehradun
Structure : Railway Pier RP-2 Actual Water table Depth : Not met
BH 2-RP-2 Water table assumed for Calculation : 0.0 m
Chainage : Km. 000.7836

Effective overburden
Observed SPT Value

SPT corrected (N1)60

Depth below EGL, m

Submerged Density

2
Saturated density

Cyclic Stress ratio

Fine Content ( % )

Total overburden
pressure (s o ), t/m
Stress reduction
coefficient (rd)
Type of Strata

Conclusion
CRRM = 7.5
2
(s o ), t/m

(N 1)60cs
(CSR)
(t/m )

(t/m )

CRR

FOS
3

CN

CB

CR
CE

CS

β
1.50 Filled up
Non
3.00 CL 24 1.86 0.86 0.00 0.98 2.79 1.29 0.16 1.70 1.00 1.05 0.80 1.00 34.27 0.00 1.00 34.27 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
4.50 GP 29 1.81 0.81 6.00 0.97 5.51 2.51 0.25 1.70 1.00 1.05 0.85 1.00 44.00 0.03 1.00 44.24 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
6.00 CI 25 1.68 0.68 88.29 0.95 8.03 3.53 0.25 1.68 1.00 1.05 0.95 1.00 41.96 5.00 1.20 55.35 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
7.50 GW 27 1.78 0.78 80.00 0.94 10.70 4.70 0.25 1.46 1.00 1.05 0.95 1.00 39.26 5.00 1.20 52.12 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
9.00 GW 100 2.01 1.01 11.00 0.93 13.72 6.22 0.24 1.27 1.00 1.05 0.95 1.00 126.53 1.21 1.03 131.09 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
10.50 GW 100 1.99 0.99 9.35 0.89 16.70 7.70 0.23 1.14 1.00 1.05 1 1.00 119.68 0.66 1.02 122.57 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
12.00 GW 100 2.02 1.02 7.26 0.85 19.73 9.23 0.21 1.04 1.00 1.05 1 1.00 109.29 0.16 1.01 110.49 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
13.50 GW 100 2.01 1.01 6.54 0.81 22.75 10.75 0.20 0.96 1.00 1.05 1 1.00 101.28 0.07 1.01 102.03 NA NA >1
Liquefiable
Non
15.00 GW 100 2.04 1.04 5.58 0.77 25.81 12.31 0.19 0.90 1.00 1.05 1 1.00 94.64 0.01 1.00 94.96 NA NA >1
Liquefiable

1) The project site falls in Zone - IV. A maximum earthquake intensity of 7.5 has been considered in the analysis.
2) The peak ground acceleration amax/g = 0.18 ( Zone factor for zone - IV = 0.24 , Importance factor = 1.50 , Design ground acceleration = (0.24/2)*1.5 = 0.18 g )
3) CE = Correction for hammer energy ratio = ER/60, ER for Rope and pully System = 60 % , Hence CE = 60/60 = 1.0
4) Borehole diameter = 150 mm , Hence CB = 1.05
5) CS = Correction for Standard sampler = 1.0
6) Magnitude scaling factor (MSF) = 1.0 has been taken in the analysis. ( Recommened revised MSF)

11.0 LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF PILE

The clients also desired that load carrying capacity of pile for this site be
evaluated M/S TCS Dehradun computed the same. The same is re-produced
below, which seems to be alright. The capacity of 1.2 m dia bored cast-in-situ
RCC pile 27 m. long is estimated at 480 tonnes. However, it is recommended
to get the pile tested at site under the supervision of geotechnical experts and
pile capacity exhibited be load test be considered as true capacity or lower of
2 values (one, computed by analytical method, as per the actual load computed
by load test results).

21
 Calculations for Railway Pier RP-1:

Vertical Pile Capacity Calculation of pile For Railway pier RP-1

Pile Diameter 1200 mm Factor of Safety for Shaft Friction 2.5 As per Cl. 6.1, iii)-a); IRS
Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ks 1.00 Factor of Safety for Base Resistance 2.5 (Bridge sub-structure and
2
Max. Eff. Overburden Pressure at 15.0
pile tip t/m Adhesion Factor, a 0.3
d/f = 1

Soil skin resistance till 3 m is not considered

Angle Eff. Over- B ased o n M ayerho ff's eqn. Base Resistance, P pu = A p * (C.N c + q.N q + 0.5.g.B .N g)
Depth of
of Angle of Effective burden
Layer Cohesion, C
Sheari Wall Unit wt. of Pressure Ppu
from GL (t/m2) Nc Nq Ng C.Nc q.Nq 0.5.g.B.N g
ng friction, d soil (t/m3) at tip (in tonnes)
(m)
Resist 'qtip'
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)
Overburden 0.00
0.0 1.0 30.0 30.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 21.00 22.40 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.0 1.0 35.0 35.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 50.00 48.03 9.00 0.00 28.82 0.00
6.0 3.2 27.0 27.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 14.00 15.49 28.80 Not Applicable 32.57
7.5 5.0 22.0 22.0 1.00 7.50 9.00 10.00 5.39 45.00 Not Applicable 50.89
9.0 4.1 28.5 28.5 1.00 9.00 9.00 17.40 18.94 36.90 Not Applicable 41.73
12.0 0.8 35.0 35.0 1.00 12.00 9.00 50.00 48.03 6.84 600.00 28.82 718.91
13.5 0.9 32.0 32.0 1.00 13.50 9.00 28.20 32.65 8.10 380.70 19.59 461.88
15.0 4.6 22.0 22.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 10.00 5.39 41.40 Not Applicable 46.82
16.5 3.8 24.0 24.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 10.00 5.39 19.53 Not Applicable 22.09
18.0 5.5 21.0 21.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 10.00 5.39 28.27 Not Applicable 31.97
21.0 1.1 28.0 28.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 16.20 17.79 5.65 243.00 10.68 293.29
24.0 1.6 32.0 32.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 28.20 32.65 14.40 423.00 19.59 516.84
27.0 0.6 34.0 34.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 42.00 42.90 5.40 630.00 25.74 747.73
30.0 1.1 35.0 35.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 50.00 48.03 9.90 750.00 28.82 892.02

Safe
Shaft Friction Psu =(S(Ks.Pdi .Tand).Asi + a.c.As) Safe
Total Load
Eff. Over- Load
Depth of Ult. due to Safe Effective
burden due to
Layer Capacity Shaft Load Pile
Pressure (Ks.Pdi.Tand). End
from GL Asi (m 2) a.c.As Psu , Pu Frictio (Tonne Length
at c.g of Asi Bearing
(m) (Tonnes n s) (meters)
the layer (Tonnes
) (Tonnes
'Pdi' (t/m )2 )
)
(1) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23)
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -3.0
3.0 1.50 11.31 11.88 3.39 3.39 3.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
6.0 1.50 11.31 NA 14.25 17.64 50.2 7.1 13.0 20.1 3.0
7.5 0.75 5.65 NA 22.73 40.38 91.3 16.2 20.4 36.5 4.5
9.0 8.25 5.65 NA 29.69 70.06 111.8 28.0 16.7 44.7 6.0
12.0 10.50 11.31 83.15 32.27 102.33 821.2 40.9 287.6 328.5 9.0
13.5 12.75 5.65 45.05 33.79 136.12 598.0 54.4 184.8 239.2 10.5
15.0 14.25 5.65 NA 41.60 177.72 224.5 71.1 18.7 89.8 12.0
16.5 15.00 5.65 NA 48.04 225.76 247.9 90.3 8.8 99.1 13.5
18.0 15.00 5.65 NA 57.37 283.14 315.1 113.3 12.8 126.0 15.0
21.0 15.00 11.31 90.20 61.11 434.45 727.7 173.8 117.3 291.1 18.0
24.0 15.00 11.31 106.01 66.54 606.99 1123.8 242.8 206.7 449.5 21.0
27.0 15.00 11.31 114.43 68.57 789.99 1537.7 316.0 299.1 615.1 24.0
30.0 15.00 11.31 118.79 72.30 981.08 1873.1 392.4 356.8 749.2 27.0

22
 Calculations for Railway Pier RP-2:

Vertical Pile Capacity Calculation of pile For Railway pier RP-2

Pile Diameter 1200 mm Factor of Safety for Shaft Friction 2.5 As per Cl. 6.1, iii)-a); IRS
Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ks 1.00 Factor of Safety for Base Resistance 2.5 (Bridge sub-structure and
2
Max. Eff. Overburden Pressure at 15.0
pile tip t/m Adhesion Factor, a 0.3
d/f = 1

Soil skin resistance till 3 m is not considered

Angle Eff. Over- B ased o n M ayerho ff's eqn. B ase Resistance, P pu = A p * (C.N c + q.N q + 0.5.g.B .N g)
Depth of
of Angle of Effective burden
Layer Cohesion, C
Sheari Wall Unit wt. of Pressure Ppu
from GL (t/m2) Nc Nq Ng C.Nc q.Nq 0.5.g.B.N g
(m)
ng friction, d soil (t/m3) at tip (in tonnes)
Resist 'qtip'
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)

Overburden 0.00
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.0 4.8 15.0 15.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 6.10 2.65 43.20 0.00 1.59 48.86
6.0 7.0 25.0 25.0 1.00 0.00 9.00 10.00 10.88 63.00 Not Applicable 71.25
7.5 5.6 20.0 20.0 1.00 7.50 9.00 10.00 5.39 50.40 Not Applicable 57.00
9.0 1.1 36.0 36.0 1.00 9.00 9.00 61.20 60.30 9.90 Not Applicable 11.20
12.0 1.2 35.0 35.0 1.00 12.00 9.00 50.00 48.03 10.80 Not Applicable 12.21
13.5 3.5 35.0 35.0 1.00 13.50 9.00 50.00 48.03 31.50 Not Applicable 35.63
15.0 6.5 10.0 10.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 3.90 1.22 58.50 Not Applicable 66.16
16.5 6.2 11.0 11.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 3.90 1.22 31.87 Not Applicable 36.04
18.0 6.4 10.0 10.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 3.90 1.22 32.90 Not Applicable 37.20
21.0 2.0 32.0 32.0 1.00 15.00 5.14 28.20 32.65 10.28 423.00 19.59 512.19
24.0 1.8 31.0 31.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 24.60 27.53 16.20 369.00 16.52 454.33
27.0 1.2 32.0 32.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 28.20 32.65 10.80 423.00 19.59 512.77
30.0 3.0 30.0 30.0 1.00 15.00 9.00 21.00 22.40 27.00 315.00 13.44 401.99

Safe
Shaft Friction Psu =(S(Ks.Pdi .Tand).Asi + a.c.As) Safe
Total Load
Eff. Over- Load
Depth of Ult. due to Safe Effective
burden due to
Layer Capacity Shaft Load Pile
Pressure (Ks.Pdi.Tand). End
from GL Asi (m 2) a.c.As Psu , Pu Frictio (Tonne Length
at c.g of Asi Bearing
(m) (Tonnes n s) (meters)
the layer (Tonnes
) (Tonnes
'Pdi' (t/m2) )
)
(1) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23)
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -3.0
3.0 1.50 11.31 NA 16.29 16.29 65.1 6.5 19.5 26.1 0.0
6.0 1.50 11.31 NA 40.04 56.32 127.6 22.5 28.5 51.0 3.0
7.5 0.75 5.65 NA 49.54 105.86 162.9 42.3 22.8 65.1 4.5
9.0 8.25 5.65 NA 51.40 157.26 168.5 62.9 4.5 67.4 6.0
12.0 10.50 11.31 NA 55.47 212.74 225.0 85.1 4.9 90.0 9.0
13.5 12.75 5.65 NA 61.41 274.15 309.8 109.7 14.3 123.9 10.5
15.0 14.25 5.65 NA 72.44 346.59 412.7 138.6 26.5 165.1 12.0
16.5 15.00 5.65 NA 82.96 429.54 465.6 171.8 14.4 186.2 13.5
18.0 15.00 5.65 NA 93.81 523.36 560.6 209.3 14.9 224.2 15.0
21.0 15.00 11.31 106.01 100.60 729.96 1242.1 292.0 204.9 496.9 18.0
24.0 15.00 11.31 101.93 106.71 938.61 1392.9 375.4 181.7 557.2 21.0
27.0 15.00 11.31 106.01 110.78 1155.39 1668.2 462.2 205.1 667.3 24.0
30.0 15.00 11.31 97.95 120.96 1374.29 1776.3 549.7 160.8 710.5 27.0

23
12.0 CONCLUSIONS

All the soil samples had been tested and their results have been reported in
this document in different tables and Figs. The client may decide suitability of
these samples of rock and soil according to the project requirements

References
1. IS: 1498-1970 (reaffirmed – 1987) - Classification and Identification of Soil for
Civil Engineering Purpose.

2. Mittal Satyendra & Shukla J. P., “Soil Testing for Engineers”, Khanna
Publishers, Delhi.

(Satyendra Mittal )
P.I.

24